This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

My dogs are always very thoughtful. They happily greet me when I arrive home, sit when I tell them to, help dispose of bones and table scraps, and alert me if someone walks by the house. I think they are thoughtful and considerate!

Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

Originally Posted by MyOwnDrum

My dogs are always very thoughtful. They happily greet me when I arrive home, sit when I tell them to, help dispose of bones and table scraps, and alert me if someone walks by the house. I think they are thoughtful and considerate!

Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

Nice Red Herring. No one said anything about any kind of thoughtless animals. If you just "disagreed" why did you try to use my comment out of context? So dishonest.

You can ignore the reality of the situation and the fact it is hurting our military all you like. The only people who will pay is our solders. A military made of solders not ready to fight a real war.

See, now you're just trying to pick at a scab that isn't even there.
Very well. . . .Fully quoting to get you back on track:

Originally Posted by Blackdog

We still teach young men and women to kill without thought. To kill on a superiors orders without question. Do you really think that does not have an effect on a young man or woman?

We want you to respect the enemy, but kill him when needed. We were taught the enemy was the enemy and the idea is to kill him so he cannot kill you. Stupid politicians and bleeding heart civilians running the military when they have no ****ing clue.

This is why our military today is so ****ed up today. We are not preparing them for war. We are preparing them for some kind of deranged social experiment.

And my reply still applies to the whole entire point you tried to make - whether I quoted the whole thing or not:

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

Taught to kill without thought?

If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now.

Followed with:

perhaps I just consider my husband and others to be more human than thoughtless animals, even on the battlefield.

So you seemed lost, you're picking it apart too muchb. . .

My view:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and I feel we shouldn't because it's not necessary.

Not that complicated of a sentiment, there.

Your view:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and you feel we should because we are really preparing our soldiers for some sort of "derranged social experiement"

and, apparently, you feel that Hassan is an example of your view.

But you're overlooking the fact that flippants like Hassan have been found in every army - throughout history - he's not the first - so obviously it's not a product of something like "pc warfare" which coincides with our modern era.

If a soldier has serious moral issues that impare their views and they do NOT agree with what they're expected to do there are outs - ALWAYS have been - they're given based on religious and other issues and they're implimented all the time.

So that's what Hassan should have done - This whole "we're messing up our soldiers by NOT teaching them to hate everyone" is a bit skewed in this regard.

A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.

Re: Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy. We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and I feel we shouldn't because it's not necessary.

Not that complicated of a sentiment, there.

And as I stated before it's liberal pussy thinking like that, that gets our solders killed.

And people wonder why we can't win wars anymore.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and you feel we should because we are really preparing our soldiers for some sort of "derranged social experiement"

Yes.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

and, apparently, you feel that Hassan is an example of your view.

Please point out where I said anything of the sort, or even implyed it?

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

But you're overlooking the fact that flippants like Hassan have been found in every army - throughout history - he's not the first - so obviously it's not a product of something like "pc warfare" which coincides with our modern era.

How am I overlooking it? I have not even mentioned him in the last what, 4 posts?

Truth is I know this, so what?

I think your own statement sums up my position...

"If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now." - Aunt Spiker

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

If a soldier has serious moral issues that impare their views and they do NOT agree with what they're expected to do there are outs - ALWAYS have been - they're given based on religious and other issues and they're implimented all the time.

Solders have had "moral" issues since the beginning of time. today It is part of a mixed race, sex, religion modern military. It has been and will continue to be a problem.

Discharging or locking up people who disagree on whatever grounds is illegal if you have no evidence. Thought is still not a crime.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

So that's what Hassan should have done - This whole "we're messing up our soldiers by NOT teaching them to hate everyone" is a bit skewed in this regard.

No it's not. He should have been relieved as soon as a problem was seen for his own safety. They did not see a problem legitimate or not. So for this argument it is irrelevant.

The military is not perfect and people will fall through the cracks. Welcome to reality and human fallibility.

Last edited by Black Dog; 11-10-09 at 01:13 PM.

Originally Posted by Moot

Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.

Originally Posted by Absentglare

You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.